That blog (and its admin) is a real piece of work. But the raison d'etre is revealing in just how washed he is with white male privilege and how devoted he is to enforcing it all.

He (and his contributors) makes all kinds of assumptions about "American" women and how these women operate. Interestingly, his definition of what a REAL woman is does include LBTQ women. It is also backflippin' hilarious that his definition of American women is restricted to White women (that handsome, rich, ex-Marine businessman states that he is dating a Vietnamese woman...and fails to make the connection that she TOO is American). Additionally, they follow the same Patriarchal Enforcement Maxim that "Feminists are not REAL Women," because REAL women will act more like June Cleaver and Jane Jetson/Wilma Flinstone (just look at the list on the side and try coming to a different conclusion).

I agree that the site has not violated any of Blogger's terms of use and that calling it "hate speech" is not appropriate.

But it is wrong to assume things about Anon1, such as they were offended by the thought that someone didn't want them. We know not the gender or the place of residence of this person. Your last line, Anon2, is unnecessary.

Well, from what I've seen on sites commenting on this, it appears to fall under "doth protest too much".

Like, "We don't care about this person/site SO much, that we're going to spend an entire long comment thread not caring at all, by devoting a lot of attention to him/his site!", when the proper response would be to simply ignore/move on with life.